Characteristics and risk factors of COVID-19 breakthrough infections in Idiopathic Inflammatory Myopathies: Results from the COVAD study.

OBJECTIVES: To explore prevalence, characteristics and risk factors of COVID-19 breakthrough infections (BIs) in idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) using data from the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. METHODS: A validated patient self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group to collect data on COVID-19 infection and vaccination in 2022. BIs were defined as COVID-19 occurring ≥14 days after 2 vaccine doses. We compared BIs characteristics and severity among IIMs, other autoimmune rheumatic and non-rheumatic diseases (AIRD, nrAID), and healthy controls (HC). Multivariable Cox regression models assessed the risk factors for BI, severe BI and hospitalisations among IIMs. RESULTS: Among 9449 included response, BIs occurred in 1447 (15.3%) respondents, median age 44 years (IQR 21), 77.4% female, and 182 BIs (12.9%) occurred among 1406 IIMs. Multivariable Cox regression among IIMs showed age as a protective factor for BIs [Hazard Ratio (HR)=0.98, 95%CI = 0.97-0.99], hydroxychloroquine and sulfasalazine use were risk factors (HR = 1.81, 95%CI = 1.24-2.64, and HR = 3.79, 95%CI = 1.69-8.42, respectively). Glucocorticoid use was a risk factor for severe BI (HR = 3.61, 95%CI = 1.09-11.8). Non-White ethnicity (HR = 2.61, 95%CI = 1.03-6.59) was a risk factor for hospitalisation. Compared with other groups, patients with IIMs required more supplemental oxygen therapy (IIM = 6.0% vs AIRD = 1.8%, nrAID = 2.2%, and HC = 0.9%), intensive care unit admission (IIM = 2.2% vs AIRD = 0.6%, nrAID, and HC = 0%), advanced treatment with antiviral or monoclonal antibodies (IIM = 34.1% vs AIRD = 25.8%, nrAID = 14.6%, and HC = 12.8%), and had more hospitalisation (IIM = 7.7% vs AIRD = 4.6%, nrAID = 1.1%, and HC = 1.5%). CONCLUSION: Patients with IIMs are susceptible to severe COVID-19 BI. Age and immunosuppressive treatments were related to the risk of BIs.

Flares in IIMs and the timeline following COVID-19 vaccination: a combined analysis of the COVAD-1 and -2 surveys.

OBJECTIVES: Disease flares in the post-coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination period represent a prominent concern, though risk factors are poorly understood. We studied these flares among patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) and other autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs). METHODS: The COVAD-1 and -2 global surveys were circulated in early 2021 and 2022, respectively, and we captured demographics, comorbidities, AIRDs details, COVID-19 infection history and vaccination details. Flares of IIMs were defined as (a) patient self-reported, (b) immunosuppression (IS) denoted, (c) clinical sign directed and (d) with >7.9-point minimal clinically significant improvement difference worsening of Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) PROMISPF10a score. Risk factors of flares were analysed using regression models. RESULTS: Of 15 165 total respondents, 1278 IIMs (age 63 years, 70.3% female, 80.8% Caucasians) and 3453 AIRDs were included. Flares of IIM were seen in 9.6%, 12.7%, 8.7% and 19.6% patients by definitions (a) to (d), respectively, with a median time to flare of 71.5 (10.7-235) days, similar to AIRDs. Patients with active IIMs pre-vaccination (OR 1.2; 95% CI 1.03, 1.6, P = 0.025) were prone to flares, while those receiving rituximab (OR 0.3; 95% CI 0.1, 0.7, P = 0.010) and AZA (OR 0.3, 95% CI 0.1, 0.8, P = 0.016) were at lower risk. Female gender and comorbidities predisposed to flares requiring changes in IS. Asthma (OR 1.62; 95% CI 1.05, 2.50, P = 0.028) and higher pain visual analogue score (OR 1.19; 95% CI 1.11, 1.27, P < 0.001) were associated with disparity between self-reported and IS-denoted flares. CONCLUSION: A diagnosis of IIMs confers an equal risk of flares in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period to AIRDs, with active disease, female gender and comorbidities conferring a higher risk. Disparity between patient- and physician-reported outcomes represents a future avenue for exploration.

Correlates of breakthrough COVID-19 in vaccinated patients with systemic sclerosis: survival analysis from a multicentre international patient-reported survey.

This study aimed to assess the incidence, predictors, and outcomes of breakthrough infection (BI) following coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc), a risk group associated with an immune-suppressed state and high cardiopulmonary disease burden. Cross-sectional data from fully vaccinated respondents with SSc, non-SSc autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs), and healthy controls (HCs) were extracted from the COVAD database, an international self-reported online survey. BI was defined according to the Centre for Disease Control definition. Infection-free survival was compared between the groups using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank tests. Cox proportional regression was used to assess the association between BI and age, sex, ethnicity, and immunosuppressive drugs at the time of vaccination. The severity of BI in terms of hospitalization and requirement for oxygen supplementation was compared between groups. Of 10,900 respondents, 6836 fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: 427 SSc, 2934 other AIRDs, and 3475 HCs. BI were reported in 6.3% of SSc, 6.9% of non-SSc AIRD, and 16.1% of HCs during a median follow-up of 100 (IQR: 60-137) days. SSc had a lower risk for BI than HC [hazard ratio (HR): 0.56 (95% CI 0.46-0.74)]. BIs were associated with age [HR: 0.98 (0.97-0.98)] but not ethnicity or immunosuppressive drugs at the time of vaccination. Patients with SSc were more likely to have asymptomatic COVID-19, but symptomatic patients reported more breathlessness. Hospitalization [SSc: 4 (14.8%), HCs: 37 (6.6%), non-SSc AIRDs: 32(15.8%)] and the need for oxygenation [SSc: 1 (25%); HC: 17 (45.9%); non-SSc AIRD: 13 (40.6%)] were similar between the groups. The incidence of BI in SSc was lower than that in HCs but comparable to that in non-SSc AIRDs. The severity of BI did not differ between the groups. Advancing age, but not ethnicity or immunosuppressive medication use, was associated with BIs.

COVID-19 vaccine safety during pregnancy and breastfeeding in women with autoimmune diseases: results from the COVAD study.

OBJECTIVES: We investigated COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnant and breastfeeding women with autoimmune diseases (AID) in the COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. METHODS: Delayed-onset (>7 days) vaccine-related adverse events (AE), disease flares (DF), and AID-related treatment modifications were analyzed upon diagnosis of AID versus healthy controls (HC) and the pregnancy/breastfeeding status at the time of at least one dose of vaccine. RESULTS: Among the 9201 participants to the self-administered online survey, 6787 (73.8%) were women. Forty pregnant and 52 breastfeeding patients with AID were identified, of whom the majority had received at least one dose of COVID-19 vaccine (100% and 96.2%, respectively). AE were reported significantly more frequently in pregnant than in non-pregnant patients (overall AE 45% vs 26%, p= 0.01; minor AE 40% vs 25.9%, p= 0.03; major AE 17.5% vs 4.6%, p< 0.01), but no difference was found in comparison with pregnant HC. No difference was observed between breastfeeding patients and HC with respect to AE. Post-vaccination DF were reported by 17.5% of pregnant and 20% of breastfeeding patients, and by 18.3% of age- and disease-matched non-pregnant and non-breastfeeding patients (n = 262). All pregnant/breastfeeding patients who experienced a DF were managed with glucocorticoids; 28.6% and 20% of them required initiation or change in immunosuppressants, respectively. CONCLUSION: This study provides reassuring insights into the safety of COVID-19 vaccines administered to women with AID during the gestational and post-partum periods, helping overcome hesitant attitudes, as the benefits for the mother and the fetus by passive immunization appear to outweigh potential risks.

Long-term safety of COVID vaccination in individuals with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies: results from the COVAD study.

Limited evidence on long-term COVID-19 vaccine safety in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs) continues to contribute to vaccine hesitancy. We studied delayed-onset vaccine adverse events (AEs) in patients with IIMs, other systemic autoimmune and inflammatory disorders (SAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the second COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) study. A validated self-reporting e-survey was circulated by the COVAD study group (157 collaborators, 106 countries) from Feb-June 2022. We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, IIM/SAID details, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details. Delayed-onset (> 7 day) AEs were analyzed using regression models. A total of 15165 respondents undertook the survey, of whom 8759 responses from vaccinated individuals [median age 46 (35-58) years, 74.4% females, 45.4% Caucasians] were analyzed. Of these, 1390 (15.9%) had IIMs, 50.6% other SAIDs, and 33.5% HCs. Among IIMs, 16.3% and 10.2% patients reported minor and major AEs, respectively, and 0.72% (n = 10) required hospitalization. Notably patients with IIMs experienced fewer minor AEs than other SAIDs, though rashes were expectedly more than HCs [OR 4.0; 95% CI 2.2-7.0, p < 0.001]. IIM patients with active disease, overlap myositis, autoimmune comorbidities, and ChadOx1 nCOV-19 (Oxford/AstraZeneca) recipients reported AEs more often, while those with inclusion body myositis, and BNT162b2 (Pfizer) recipients reported fewer AEs. Vaccination is reassuringly safe in individuals with IIMs, with AEs, hospitalizations comparable to SAIDs, and largely limited to those with autoimmune multimorbidity and active disease. These observations may inform guidelines to identify high-risk patients warranting close monitoring in the post-vaccination period.

Systemic sclerosis and COVID-19 vaccine safety: short-term insights from the global COVID-19 vaccination in autoimmune disease (COVAD) survey.

The safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines is understudied in patients with systemic sclerosis (SSc). We compared short-term adverse events (AEs) 7 days following vaccination in patients with SSc vs other rheumatic (AIRDs), non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs), and healthy controls (HCs). The COVID-19 Vaccination in autoimmune diseases (COVAD) self-reporting e-survey was circulated by a group of > 110 collaborators in 94 countries from March to December 2021. AEs were analyzed between different groups using regression models. Of 10,679 complete respondents [73.8% females, mean age 43 years, 53% Caucasians], 478 had SSc. 83% had completed two vaccine doses, Pfizer-BioNTech (BNT162b2) (51%) was the most common. Minor and major AEs were reported by 81.2% and 3.3% SSc patients, respectively, and did not differ significantly with disease activity or different vaccine types, though with minor symptom differences. Frequencies of AEs were not affected by background immunosuppression, though SSc patients receiving hydroxychloroquine experienced fatigue less commonly (OR 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8). Frequency of AEs and hospitalisations were similar to other AIRDs, nrAIDs, and HC except a higher risk of chills (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.7) and fatigue (OR 1.3; 95% CI 1.0-1.6) compared to other AIRDs. COVID-19 vaccines were largely safe and well tolerated in SSc patients in the short term. Background immunosuppression and disease activity did not influence the vaccination-related short-term AEs.

Flares in autoimmune rheumatic diseases in the post-COVID-19 vaccination period-a cross-sequential study based on COVAD surveys.

OBJECTIVE: Flares of autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) following COVID-19 vaccination are a particular concern in vaccine-hesitant individuals. Therefore, we investigated the incidence, predictors and patterns of flares following vaccination in individuals living with AIRDs, using global COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) surveys. METHODS: The COVAD surveys were used to extract data on flare demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 history, and vaccination details for patients with AIRDs. Flares following vaccination were identified as patient-reported (a), increased immunosuppression (b), clinical exacerbations (c) and worsening of PROMIS scores (d). We studied flare characteristics and used regression models to differentiate flares among various AIRDs. RESULTS: Of 15 165 total responses, the incidence of flares in 3453 patients with AIRDs was 11.3%, 14.8%, 9.5% and 26.7% by definitions a-d, respectively. There was moderate agreement between patient-reported and immunosuppression-defined flares (K = 0.403, P = 0.022). Arthritis (61.6%) and fatigue (58.8%) were the most commonly reported symptoms. Self-reported flares were associated with higher comorbidities (P = 0.013), mental health disorders (MHDs) (P < 0.001) and autoimmune disease multimorbidity (AIDm) (P < 0.001).In regression analysis, the presence of AIDm [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.7; P = 0.003), or a MHD (OR = 1.7; 95% CI: 1.1, 2.6; P = 0.007), or being a Moderna vaccine recipient (OR = 1.5; 95% CI: 1.09, 2.2; P = 0.014) were predictors of flares. Use of MMF (OR = 0.5; 95% CI: 0.3, 0.8; P = 0.009) and glucocorticoids (OR = 0.6; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.8; P = 0.003) were protective.A higher frequency of patients with AIRDs reported overall active disease post-vaccination compared with before vaccination (OR = 1.3; 95% CI: 1.1, 1.5; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Flares occur in nearly 1 in 10 individuals with AIRDs after COVID vaccination; people with comorbidities (especially AIDm), MHDs and those receiving the Moderna vaccine are particularly vulnerable. Future avenues include exploring flare profiles and optimizing vaccine strategies for this group.

Vaccine hesitancy decreases in rheumatic diseases, long-term concerns remain in myositis: a comparative analysis of the COVAD surveys.

OBJECTIVE: COVID-19 vaccines have a favorable safety profile in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (AIRDs) such as idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIMs); however, hesitancy continues to persist among these patients. Therefore, we studied the prevalence, predictors and reasons for hesitancy in patients with IIMs, other AIRDs, non-rheumatic autoimmune diseases (nrAIDs) and healthy controls (HCs), using data from the two international COVID-19 Vaccination in Autoimmune Diseases (COVAD) e-surveys. METHODS: The first and second COVAD patient self-reported e-surveys were circulated from March to December 2021, and February to June 2022 (ongoing). We collected data on demographics, comorbidities, COVID-19 infection and vaccination history, reasons for hesitancy, and patient reported outcomes. Predictors of hesitancy were analysed using regression models in different groups. RESULTS: We analysed data from 18 882 (COVAD-1) and 7666 (COVAD-2) respondents. Reassuringly, hesitancy decreased from 2021 (16.5%) to 2022 (5.1%) (OR: 0.26; 95% CI: 0.24, 0.30, P < 0.001). However, concerns/fear over long-term safety had increased (OR: 3.6; 95% CI: 2.9, 4.6, P < 0.01). We noted with concern greater skepticism over vaccine science among patients with IIMs than AIRDs (OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.08, 3.2, P = 0.023) and HCs (OR: 4; 95% CI: 1.9, 8.1, P < 0.001), as well as more long-term safety concerns/fear (IIMs vs AIRDs - OR: 1.9; 95% CI: 1.2, 2.9, P = 0.001; IIMs vs HCs - OR: 5.4 95% CI: 3, 9.6, P < 0.001). Caucasians [OR 4.2 (1.7-10.3)] were likely to be more hesitant, while those with better PROMIS physical health score were less hesitant [OR 0.9 (0.8-0.97)]. CONCLUSION: Vaccine hesitancy has decreased from 2021 to 2022, long-term safety concerns remain among patients with IIMs, particularly in Caucasians and those with poor physical function.

Assessment of quality and reliability of YouTube videos for patient and physician education on inflammatory myositis.

INTRODUCTION: YouTube is the second most popular search website worldwide to access health information online. This study was undertaken to assess the reliability and quality of information about myositis on YouTube and delineate attributes of useful videos using standard metrics. METHODS: We conducted a thorough search on YouTube using 9 search terms related to myositis. The inclusion criteria were content related to myositis, English language and acceptable audio-video quality. Duplicates and advertisements were excluded from the analysis. Videos were classified as useful, not very useful or misleading and patient narratives. Reliability was determined using the mDISCERN criteria, quality using the Global Quality Scale (GQS) and JAMA system, using appropriate cut-offs (mDISCERN > 4, GQS > 4, JAMA > 3). RESULTS: Out of a total of 900 videos, 453 were included for the analysis. Seventy-four per cent and 2% provided useful and not very useful information respectively, while 24% were patient narratives. Seventy-one per cent were intended specifically for patients while 69% were for healthcare providers and students. Noteworthily, useful and not very useful videos had similar total views though the number of likes and daily viewership were higher for useful videos (p = 0.024, p = 0.046). Nearly half (47%) of useful videos were by professional medical societies/patient support groups (PSGs) while not very useful ones were by nonmedical media (38%). Physician-predicted usefulness was discordant with score-based usefulness (κ = 0.129). However, GQS emerged as a significant (p = 0.008) predictor of video usefulness in multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: A large majority of English YouTube videos on myositis provide useful information for patients. Physicians could signpost patients to high-quality useful videos as determined by GQS and sources like professional medical societies and PSGs. Key Points •This study highlights the importance of regulating health information posted online, accessed by millions of people, to gauge the quality of information and to identify and curb misinformation. •It also identifies recommendations for the future for uploading such content on the Internet. •The implications lie in our patients being better informed about their disease as they are important stakeholders in the healthcare decision-making process.